That's some soggy strawman right there. But if a real-world example for your own argument was too much, here: At the end of the day, the armor is as convenient or as tedious as the developers want it to be. If they want armor restrictions and not being able to swap stuff around freely to be part of the challenge of the game, fine. You can't weasel around that, because it's sci-fi, and all sci-fi attempts to at least play at some level realism. How much or little reality is involved is up to the creators.
Of course I can "weasel" around it, precisely because it's sci-fi, precisely because it's a game about which the developers ask the players for feedback, and precisely because your call for realism is like all others made on these threads, being some partial realism just to fit your vision, not allowing others the same, and as such is not worth any more than any other's opinion around here. At the end of the day I don't play games I don't like, and no one forces players to do anything. So here I'm telling you that armor lockers requirement is turkey stuffing no one is forced to like. And here I mention it, and I would like it to be removed, that's all. Any problem with that?
Nowhere did I say my opinion was worth more than any other's. Nowhere did I claim my opinion was some objective truth and wasn't my own vision of what makes sense. Nowhere did I disallow anyone else to have a differing opinion. I said I think the armor lockers make sense, that's all. Get off your high horse.
And I say they don't, even if some Apollo astronaut used a helping hand to put a spacesuit on. Because it's a game, made to have fun. You know that word, "fun" ? Very very subjective thing, and some players have a very personal view of "fun" I often compare to some desire of accomplishment most adults usually find in their day job.
And now you're criticizing what people consider 'fun' in the same breath as admitting it's subjective. Too much fallacy in too few posts, so I'm out. You have yourself a nice day.
Call it whatever you want : you are not "the people" but only one player, and your definition of "fun" can be whatever you want, but you can't say armor locker requirement is there for "more fun" and not even for "more realism". Being stuck in a hole because armor can't be changed / removed is a cheap shot. I don't like cheap shots like these. You can dig holes in the ground with a laser drill that magically moves tons of ore in a magical backpack, but nooooo sir, there has to be an armor locker to remove this crappy rigid suit or else I starve in a hole. That is so realistic.
They could have just made it something you drag on and off like virtually everything else in the game. They went out of their way to code in restrictions and create a device for it instead. Believe what you like, you already seem very convinced of what is objectively 'fun' in a game, and 'realism' in fiction.
I just spent a week trying to get people to "like" this game and their interest only lasted two or three days. Most of what turned them off is abundantly mentioned all over this forum: awkward mechanics, difficult learning curve especially for construction and various counter-intuitive requirements, simplistic physics, ships weapon restrictions on planets, etc. They will not come to the forums to get a course on the reasons the game suffers (in their views) from such things, and will simply wait until it's finished - if it ever gets finished - to try it further. There is a point in time where players lose hindsight on a game because they adapt their analysis based on their expectations, and evidently new players who don't enjoy something at face value will not magically find bad mechanics / features "enjoyable" because experienced players have "good arguments" to defend said mechanics /features. As for "realism" all games suffer and benefit from lack of realism, and the players can cope with it as long as the pivotal selling point is "fun".
@Kassonnade You make an excellent point. Stuff that we see as a welcomed new addition to the game - might be another barrier for the new players to get inside the game. But it all gets refined in the end - for now its best just to gather player feedback. But one thing that is definitely missing is NEW PLAYER feedback, stuff that won't make it to the forums. Players that try the game but drop it after few nights. That feedback is as valuable (or more valuable) than 1000+ hour veterans.
This is 'new player' feedback. If players can't forgive a game for being incomplete, then their unrealistic expectations aren't the fault of the developers. If they're waiting for the game to be complete, that's completely rational. If more players did that, there might be less alpha/beta disappointment and mistrust towards indie projects. Some of my friends won't touch the game because the graphics are unimpressive, but I don't expect something like that is going to change fundamentally. The same players wouldn't play minecraft for the same reasons. I'm bored with the game because there isn't enough to do. After seeing a handful of planets and reaching level cap in a few dozen hours, there's little to really shoot for or look forwards to. But I'm not going to try and convince someone to play the game despite these things, that's foolish. Even when the game is 100% complete, some people aren't going to like it. Now, ignoring all the strawmen, here's why the armor system is 'fun' for its restrictions. It presents something called a 'strategic choice'. That means that there is no obvious 'best' answer, different choices might have benefits and problems to weigh. It's a choice with consequences, a tough choice. If you go into a POI with heavy armor, you're better-protected, but less mobile. If you go in with light armor, you can boost to those inaccessible places, but you're poorly protected. It's your choice to pick one or the other, or to compromise with some balanced build of medium armor, or to find some other solution. Then you have to work with the consequences of your decision, which directly impacts what you will find easy or challenging, which is a direct expression of relevant player choice and also presents opportunities to improvise and problem-solve to progress. That's 'fun' for strategic minds that like to solve problems and work out optimal solutions. That's why I'm fine with the armor locker system, because freely swapping and modifying armor without restriction would remove all strategic choice from armor selection. That it's also 'realistic' is just a side-argument to swat down any ridiculous notions of what is 'realism' is far-future sci-fi. There is no rulebook for 'realism' in sci-fi games, where abstraction becomes a necessary element to expedite gameplay, and everyone is going to draw that line of necessary-abstraction differently.
No one mentioned anything like that. I can understand how you feel about this, but that's exactly what Early Access is all about : promoting the game, despite it being "incomplete". Is this foolish ?
We're glorified unpaid playtesters who've paid for the privilege of playing an incomplete game. If you want to advertise the game, go ahead, but you're advertising an unfinished product in its unpolished state. Not everything you listed will ever get changed. Stuff like simplistic physics and restricted weapons could easily survive to full release as fully-intended features of the game. If that's going to be a deal-breaker for some players, then it's going to be a deal-breaker and that's that. No game accommodates everyone, and some players not liking the game for some reasons is not necessarily indicative of the quality of the game. Short version: It doesn't necessarily matter that your friends didn't like the game. That may never change.
Eleon would never make a clear statement to the effect they don't care about what players think of their game. Besides that I did not advertise anything, if you read what I wrote about this, and you are making an assumption (repeatedly) that the people I showed the game to are dumb and don't understand what early access is. Now you are also making an assumption that I am dumb because what you are writing here is something akin to things I wrote myself many times on the forums, but that's ok, I guess it makes you feel good, and surely you don't like to ask questions to your interlocutors and prefer to bottle them up like you are trying to do here. I learned to respect people and not suppose they are dumb, especially on a multilingual forum, because we know nothing of others but a little bit of what they write about a game. But it's been fun, I really enjoy being addressed like a dumbass who knows nothing about gaming, early access and strategy. My brother has been a gamer as long as me, he bought Empyrion and still plays it on experimental branch, and he still doesn't like the elements I mentioned. You are seeing him and me as "dumb", and some others too, on an assumption I tried to fool them into buying an incomplete game. Maybe if you cared to read you would have seen I mentioned they will wait until the game is complete (except my brother), just a hint about these "dumb" guys knowing the game is not complete. I think you are having a discussion with yourself here. Tell me something I don't know, it might get interesting. I have read many of your messages around here, and I can see you have a somewhat high opinion of yourself, by the way you assume others are ignorant. I suggest you read a bit more and ask questions instead of simply stating conclusions without clues. Clearly, if the game is advertised as incomplete on Steam, it's OK, but if I try to get people I know to try this early access game - and not "tricking" them like you make it sound - it is "foolish". I guess you just don't see the contradiction here. And now if they don't like some aspects of the game, it doesn't matter. Glad to see you have direct link to what Eleon thinks! Care to tell us about what are their plans ?
You criticize assumptions by making twice as many assumptions. You criticize not reading by not reading the very response to what you're claiming wasn't read. You talk about drawing premature conclusions when you've missed the entire point of what I just said. You go off on an irrelevant off-topic tangent tilting at the windmills you created, then accuse someone else of having a discussion with themselves. And you claim to be the one respecting people? You're the one trying to cite contradictions? I have zero interest in discussing the topic with you further.
I know. You already left the "discussion" a few messages ago... lol. I'm not expecting much here. I think I got your point pretty well, and I can understand it does not please you. Sorry for not being dumb, really.
When talking about 'realism' I would rather use the word 'believability' ad I think it suits the issue better In the end, there is no big difference but with believability we can stay within the context of a computer game. There are certain things that are unrealistic but believable like inventory management and flight systems and then there are things that are unrealistic like my personal nemesis, the weapon kit. And then there are things that are realistic, believable but simply not fun. Finding a balance here must be hard.
I also find armor lockers to be annoying and a seemingly arbitrary limitation, but I'm willing to see where the concept goes. It would be nice if the armor locker could do repairs, though. But that's not actually why I came here today. I've posted previously about temperature effects and lack of realism with respect to heat transfer. And I still believe that the entire system should be reworked. However, in the mean time (or assuming that a complete rework just isn't going to happen), I think the EVA boost should give a big boost to heat resistance. It's currently fine in extreme cold, but there's nothing to counter extreme heat. I can put on heavy armor stacked with temperature boosts, but still get heatstroke in a few seconds if I get out of my ship in a hot orbit. I think it would be reasonable to balance this by finding a way to make EVA boosts only function in space.
Still leaves no solution for lava planets though. The lack of heat protection is odd. I can't imagine it's the sort of thing that slipped through the cracks given how often it shows up, so they must intend for high-heat environments to always be dangerous. In which case, it would be nice if they revised heat stroke to not be fatal so quickly. I'm fine with the pressure of being on a clock any time I step onto a lava planet or into a hot atmosphere, but we currently have barely seconds to do anything before we need to retreat or die from heatstroke.
I suspect at that point, all your external activity on a lava planet should be grab loot, get back inside, assuming you can't grab said loot from inside your environmentally sealed vehicle. Any mining almost mandates a bottom mounted mining turret on an HV right now, and god help you if something breaches your hull because you have about 15 seconds to fix it before the heat kills you. They DID add mechanics to reduce heat, such as uncooked vegetables, oranges, and water. Which will get bulky as hell if you have to use an item every couple seconds to loot a POI.
